Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T19:29:54.214Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Adjuvants and Environment During Plant Development on Glyphosate Absorption and Translocation in Field Bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Stewart L. Sherrick ,
Harvey A. Holt  and
F. Dan Hess
Stewart L. Sherrick
Affiliation:
Purdue Univ., West Lafayette, IN 47907
Harvey A. Holt
Affiliation:
Purdue Univ., West Lafayette, IN 47907
F. Dan Hess
Affiliation:
Dep. Bot. and Plant Path., Purdue Univ., West Lafayette, IN 47907
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Absorption and translocation of glyphosate [N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine] with and without adjuvants were examined in field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis L. # CONAR) to develop an understanding of the influence of selected adjuvants and environment before application on glyphosate activity. Light intensity and humidity during plant development resulted in differences in 14C-glyphosate absorption. When applied in water or with an oxysorbic (20 POE) (polyoxyethylene sorbitan monolaurate) adjuvant, an average of 9% of the glyphosate was absorbed in plants grown in high light intensity, low humidity (HLLH) before treatment, compared to an average of 21% in plants grown in low light, high humidity (LLHH) before treatment, respectively. Amounts of epicuticular wax on HLLH field bindweed were almost three times as great as on LLHH leaves and may explain absorption differences. No differences in glyphosate absorption were observed between glyphosate applied with oxysorbic or no adjuvant even though the oxysorbic adjuvant effectively reduces surface tension. Absorption was increased two- to threefold with a polyethoxylated tallow amine adjuvant (MON 0818) compared to no adjuvant. Unlike absorption without adjuvant or with oxysorbic adjuvant, there were few absorption differences in plants grown in different environments before application. Absorption continued for 24 to 36 h after application regardless of adjuvant. Reductions in MON 0818 concentration and subsequent necrosis resulted in increased movement of radioactivity away from the site of application.

Keywords

N-(phosphonomethyl)glycinesurfactantuptakepenetrationCONAR
Type
Physiology, Chemistry, and Biochemistry
Information
Weed Science , Volume 34 , Issue 6 , November 1986 , pp. 811 - 816
Copyright
Copyright © 1986 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Baker, E. A. and Bukovac, M. J. 1971. Characterization of the components of plant cuticles in relation to the penetration of 2,4-D. Ann. Appl. Biol. 67:243–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Bukovac, M. J. 1976. Herbicide entry into plants. Pages 335–364 in Audus, L. J., ed. Herbicides: Physiology, Biochemistry, Ecology. Vol. 1. 2d ed. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
3. Currier, H. B. and Dybing, C. D. 1959. Foliar penetration of herbicides – review and present status. Weeds 7:195–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Gottrup, O., O'Sullivan, P. A., Schraa, R. J., and Vanden Born, W. H. 1976. Uptake, translocation, metabolism and selectivity of glyphosate in Canada thistle and leafy spurge. Weed Res. 16:197–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Hoagland, D. R. and Arnon, D. I. 1950. The water-culture method for growing plants without soil. Calif. Agric. Exp. Stn. Circular No. 347. 32 pp.Google Scholar
6. Hull, H. M., Davis, D. G., and Stolzenberg, G. E. 1982. Action of adjuvants on plant surfaces. Pages 10–25 in Adjuvants for Herbicides. Weed Sci. Soc. Am., Champaign, IL.Google Scholar
7. Hull, H. M., Morton, H. L., and Wharrie, J. R. 1975. Environmental influences on cuticle development and resultant foliar penetration. Bot. Rev. 41:421–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Martin, J. T. 1960. Determination of the components of plant cuticles. J. Sci. Food Agric. 11:635–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Martin, J. T. and Juniper, B. E. 1970. The cuticles of plants. St. Martin's Press, New York. 347 pp.Google Scholar
10. McWhorter, C. G. 1963. Effects of surfactants on the herbicidal activity of foliar sprays of diuron. Weeds 11:265–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. McWhorter, C. G., Jordan, T. N., and Wills, G. D. 1980. Translocation of 14C-glyphosate in soybeans (Glycine max) and johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense). Weed Sci. 28:113–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Meyer, L. J. 1978. The influence of environment on growth and control of field bindweed. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 33:141–142.Google Scholar
13. Norris, R. F. 1974. Penetration of 2,4-D in relation to cuticle thickness. Am. J. Bot. 61:74–79.Google Scholar
14. Norris, R. F. and Bukovac, M. J. 1972. Influence of cuticular waxes on penetration of pear leaf cuticle by 1-napthaleneacetic acid. Pestic. Sci. 3:705–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. O'Sullivan, P. A., O'Donovan, J. T., and Hamman, W. M. 1981. Influence of non-ionic surfactants, ammonium sulphate, water quality and spray volume on the phytotoxicity of glyphosate. Can. J. Plant Sci. 61:391–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Price, C. E. 1982. A review of the factors influencing the penetration of pesticides through plant leaves. Pages 237–252 in Cutler, D. F., Alvin, K. L., and Price, C. E., eds. The Plant Cuticle. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
17. Reed, D. W. and Tukey, H. B. Jr. 1982. Light intensity and temperature effects on epicuticular wax morphology and internal cuticle ultrastructure of carnation and Brussels sprouts leaf cuticles. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 107:417–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Reed, D. W. and Tukey, H. B. Jr. 1982. Permeability of Brussels sprouts and carnation cuticles from leaves developed in different temperatures and light intensities. Pages 267–278 in Cutler, D. F., Alvin, K. L., and Price, C. E., eds. The Plant Cuticle. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
19. Richard, E. P. Jr. and Slife, F. W. 1979. In vivo and in vitro characterization of the foliar entry of glyphosate in hemp dogbane (Apocynum cannabinum). Weed Sci. 27:426–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Sandberg, C. L., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1980. Absorption, translocation and metabolism of 14C-glyphosate in several weed species. Weed Res. 20:195–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21. Schultz, M. E. and Burnside, O. C. 1980. Absorption, translocation and metabolism of 2,4-D and glyphosate in hemp dogbane (Apocynum cannabinum). Weed Sci. 28:13–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. Sherrick, S. L., Holt, H. A., and Hess, F. D. 1986. Absorption and translocation of MON 0818 adjuvant in field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis). Weed Sci. 34:817–823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. Sprankle, P., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1975. Absorption, action, and translocation of glyphosate. Weed Sci. 23:235–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24. Stahlman, P. W. 1978. Field bindweed control in the Central Great Plains: A review. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 33:150–152.Google Scholar
25. Wyrill, J. B. III, and Burnside, O. C. 1977. Glyphosate toxicity to common milkweed and hemp dogbane as influenced by surfactants. Weed Sci. 25:275–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26. Wyrill, J. B. III, and Burnside, O. C. 1976. Absorption, translocation and metabolism of 2,4-D and glyphosate in common milkweed and hemp dogbane. Weed Sci. 24:557–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar